This study explores the dimensions of leadership in R&D organizations through studying the leadership theory and suggests an integrative approach to R&D leadership. It develops and validates a scale to access Integrated Leadership (IL) with multilevel approach for R&D organizations. Again it suggests a shorter version of the scale to assess IL. IL interacts positively to R&D performance and leader performance. Leaders’ motivation, knowledge sharing, R&D climate and HRM practices are found to boost the relationship between the IL and the R&D outcomes and leader performance.
International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET) Volume 11, Issue 1, January 2020, pp 92-104, Article ID: IJMET_11_01_010 Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijmet/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=11&IType=1 ISSN Print: 0976-6340 and ISSN Online: 0976-6359 © IAEME Publication INFLUENCE OF EMOTION BASED INTEGRATED LEADERSHIP ON R & D LEADER PERFORMANCE Pradeep Kumar Rout, Jyoti Ranjan Das, Monoranjan Puthal Institute of Business & Computer Studies, Siksha „O‟ Anusandhan Deemed to be University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India ABSTRACT This study explores the dimensions of leadership in R&D organizations through studying the leadership theory and suggests an integrative approach to R&D leadership It develops and validates a scale to access Integrated Leadership (IL) with multilevel approach for R&D organizations Again it suggests a shorter version of the scale to assess IL IL interacts positively to R&D performance and leader performance Leaders’ motivation, knowledge sharing, R&D climate and HRM practices are found to boost the relationship between the IL and the R&D outcomes and leader performance Keywords: Emotion, Motivation, Leadership, leader performance Cite this Article: Pradeep Kumar Rout, Jyoti Ranjan Das, Monoranjan Puthal, Influence of Emotion based Integrated Leadership on R & D Leader Performance International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology 11(1), 2020, pp 92-104 http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=11&IType=1 INTRODUCTION Review of literature points out that there is a reason to study cognitive, personal, interpersonal and organizational factors along with leadership which have effect on R&D performance, leader performance Studies have found that there is a relationship between transformational and transnational nature of leadership with R&D project success (Scott and Bruce, 1998) and scientists creative performance (Gupta and Singh, 2014) R&D project leaders and performance of their team members have five key jobs behavior, including strategic planning, team building, gate keeping, technical expertise and championing, which have direct impact on project performance (Kim et al., 1999) The above literature suggests that there are several other leadership dimensions beyond the conventional dimensions that are essential for R&D performance and leader performance Potential factors for R&D performance and leader performance can include relevant knowledge and technical skills, freedom to explore, divergent thinking, empowerment of subordinates, innovative behavior of R&D leaders, high-quality leader-member exchange, innovative climate, strategic planning, knowledge sharing, and HRM practices Some factors including cognition and grit, have been ignored while specifying R&D leadership The http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 92 editor@iaeme.com Influence of Emotion based Integrated Leadership on R & D Leader Performance facilitative factors can be leaders‟ motivation, knowledge sharing among scientists, R&D climate, HRM practices to further R&D outcomes and leader performance We propose a model which specifies the combination of cognitive, personal and interpersonal factors that are the driving force towards R&D performance and leader performance The discussion below deals with different leadership styles under the heading of Integrative leadership (IL) We used a multi-factorial approach by considering leader‟s cognitive abilities, leader‟s personal attributes and interpersonal characteristics into a single model IL is argued to influence R&D performance and leader performance Positive facilitative factors are proposed in the relationship of IL with R&D performance and leader performance LIETRATURE REVIEW The cognitive competencies and capacities of leader, like problem solving abilities, articulating, and creative thinking contribute to leader performance (Mumford and Connelly 1991, Zaccaro et al 2000) Partlow et al (2015) have been identified a set of cognitive abilities which is responsible for performance and outcomes Few studies have focused on the cognitive competencies of the leader Competencies in reasoning, planning, and decision making involve in emotional situations The R&D leader manages a variety of activities including those that require problem solving, decision-making, planning, and setting goals for the organization These can be broadly categorized as cognitive competencies The following competencies are seen as particularly important for an leader in organization: (a) the ability to define and analyze a problem, (b) pooling knowledge to solve problems, (c) the ability to understand work, (d) persistence when performing a difficult task, (e) good organization and planning skills, (f) knowing what decisions can be made independently, (g) knowing when to seek information or the help of others, (h) flexibility and receptiveness to other ideas, and (i) adaptability to the ambiguities of the task These activities involve planning including problem solving and decision-making Generalizable competencies include intellectual or cognitive processes These processes play a significant role in non-routine and loosely structured managerial problem-solving and decision-making situations Routine procedures are normally followed without a heavy demand on cognitive competencies Novel and non-routine problems and ambiguous situations stress the cognition difference between merely good leaders from able ones Successful leaders are successful at decision-making and planning Their orientation to management is a combination of both analytic-logical, and humanistic approaches Each of these approaches uses decision making and planning, and contributes to leadership qualities Decision making and planning require a rational attitude, which must be objective, but humanistic approaches foster or facilitate innovative solutions which are socially relevant rather than rational and objective ones These ideas have been discussed at length in the book by Das and Misra (2015) A R&D leader is faced with complex, poorly structured situations These are not solved by routine procedures There arises a need for synthetic or intuitive thinking rather than purely analytical and logical thinking Simon (1987) refers to it as intuitive thinking Intuition is not entirely a conscious and deliberate process Nevertheless, such non-conscious processes affect decision making Intuitive or synthetic thinking is usually seen in solving problems that involve emotions Thus both kinds of thinking are necessary The present study includes tasks that predominantly logical and problems that have an emotional load http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 93 editor@iaeme.com Pradeep Kumar Rout, Jyoti Ranjan Das, Monoranjan Puthal Simon‟s (1987) point is that planning and decision making are not entirely rational activities It is not only the excellence in and logic that makes a good leader a good planner Emotional, motivational, and personality predispositions also play a part in planning 2.1 Plans and Structure of Behavior In the important book on Planning, Plans and Structure of Behavior, Miller, Galanter and Pribram (1960, p.16) defined planning as “any hierarchical process in the organism that can control the order in which a sequence of operations is to be performed.” As early as 1960, Miller, Galanter, and Pribram (1960) proposed the concept of “plan”, which was like the program for a computer However, planning was not exactly like a computer program As the following quotation shows,“…the reduction of plans to nothing but programs is still a scientific hypothesis and is still in need of further validation” (p 16) This brain-computer analogy has since been one of the central problems in artificial intelligence We humans in contrast to machines are guided by motivations and emotions Decisions cannot be solely analytical A synthetic perspective is necessary as mentioned above 2.2 Logical and Affect-Laden Problems The model holds that mental functions of individuals are to be determined by the interaction between their neuro-mechanism and their life's experience (Luria, 1966) Subsequently, other authors followed Luria (Denes and Pizzamiglio, 1999; Gazzaniga, 1979) Mental or cognitive functions as decision making are shaped by motivations and emotions Importantly, these contribute to learning what is socially desirable, culturally acceptable behavior These are the central items that make up emotional intelligence In fact the best management decision is an integration of both modes of thinking, that is analytic-logical, and synthetic-affective Each of these are represented in the two tasks, Crackthe-Code test and Predicament test, in the present study Decision making in the novel situations is a challenge in an R&D organization In conclusion, deliberate or rational decision requires planning, whereas emotionally loaded decisions may not proceed with components of planning as an integrated mechanism comprising representation, anticipation, execution and regulation (Das, Kar, and Parrila, 1996) The two kinds of decision making are often called hot (emotional) and cold (logical) Damasio (1994) discusses the relationship between emotion, reason and the human brain in great detail in the book Descartes’ error 2.3 Personal Factors 2.3.1 Grit A leader possesses some individual and positive personal qualities to be successful and also to influence their subordinates to be successful ‘Grit’ (Duckworth, 2007) triggers a leader to work seriously, take challenges, put effort and show interests over a period of time to achieve success Talent and intelligence are not always and only important factor for success in many cases, rather ‘grit’ is also a factor that can be predictive of success Grit is the disposition to pursue long-term goals with passion, perseverance, zeal, hard work and sustain it over a long period of time It is an influential factor for success and predicts higher R&D achievement (Duckworth et al., 2007) It helps the achievement of difficult goals and objectives that require sustained and focused application of talent over a long period of time Gritter people are highly determined, passionate for their work, and continue it for longer time and show their commitments and dedication for successful outcomes Perseverance of effort and consistency of interest (Culin et al., 2014) are two dimensions of grit Perseverance of effort is associated with hard work, dedication and self control that lead an individual to stick and http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 94 editor@iaeme.com Influence of Emotion based Integrated Leadership on R & D Leader Performance pursue a long-term goal until the goal is achieved Perseverance does not deal with hourly wish (Duckworth et al., 2007) Consistency of interest deals with effort and interest over the years despite of failure, adversity, and plateaus in progress Grit and talent are inversely related Talented people are, average, less gritty in achieving goals Individuals who are both extremely talented and extremely gritty are very rare (Duckworth and Eskreis-Winkler, 2014) The R&D leaders succeed in a challenging environment, with higher self-efficacy, judgmental power, growth mindset and they stick to a goal over a long-period of time and continuously put effort toward achieving their research goals The R&D projects involve high risk of failure, disruptions and setbacks but R&D leaders stick to the attainment of the research objective till they succeed Grit and self control are essential for high achievement involved in novel R&D outcomes It seems that a success and growth mindset of the leader is positively correlated with grit Under high (low) level of grit, relations between leadership and R&D performance will be stronger (weaker) Grit entails the capacity to sustain both effort and interest in long-term research projects that take months or even years to complete Grit emphases on long-term goals and persistence in the face of setbacks Gritty R&D leaders were more likely to complete their R&D projects than non-gritty leaders Gritty leaders are likely to work harder and longer than their less gritty peers and, as a consequence, perform better Subordinates and HRM mangers are likely to evaluate gritty leaders‟ performance positively than non-gritty leaders 2.3.2 Personal Humility and Professional will Collins (2001) identified five levels of people work in an organization: (1) highly capable individual, (2) contributing team member, (3) competent manager, (4) effective leader, and (5) level executive (Collins, 2001, p 20) A Level leader is a competent manager who “organizes people and resources toward the effective and efficient pursuit of predetermined objectives” (Collins, 2001, p 20) A Level leader “catalyzes commitment to and vigorous pursuit of a clear and compelling vision, and stimulates the group to high performance standards” (Collins, 2001, p 20) but they are charismatic and egocentric and not build their successors for success Collins (2001) defined a Level leader as one who “builds enduring greatness through a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will” (p 20) Such leaders are more “plow horse than show horse” (Collins, 2001, p 39), selfefficacious and make sure that those around them are set up for success, fierce stoic resolve and are ambitious which is highly required for any organization They are clear, modest, servant, humble, genuine, and team player They not seek spotlight They desire to serve other employees with intense resolve or will They are dedicated to the organization, a clear catalyst in achieving results and goal, and have strong work ethics and are self-motivated These characteristics make their subordinates motivated, performance-oriented, and to work effectively for the realization of organizational goals 2.3.3 Technology savvy Goldsmith (2010) found that technological savvy is one of the five qualities of effective leaders He has also identified four things a leader needs to do: (1) A leader must understand how to use intelligent technology and that can help the organization; (2) a leader must know the process of recruitment, development of technically competent people, and maintain them in a network; (3) a leader must know how to carry out and manage investment in new technology for the use of the organization; and (4) positive role model in leading the use of new technology To meet the ever increasing demands of knowledge, R&D leaders must have the capability to manage technology strategically and the ability to think strategically along http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 95 editor@iaeme.com Pradeep Kumar Rout, Jyoti Ranjan Das, Monoranjan Puthal with other skills The ongoing structural changes have posed the need of technology savvy leaders who understand how to integrate new and emerging technologies into their organization for strategic planning to develop innovative forms of competitive advantage The leader acquainted with new technology, creates new technology and encourages subordinates to adopt the technology for his or her and subordinates‟ performance vis-à-vis organizational performance 2.4.4 Cultural sensitivity In globalized R&D organizations, the leader has to deal with employees from diverse cultures and backgrounds Unless the leader understands and appreciates the cultural differences in behavior, symbols and practices; she or he cannot be effective to work in collaboration with other R&D laboratories, different research teams or groups formed within the country and across the globe A R&D leader has to work with a diverse population, belonging to different cultures with diverse heritages, value systems, food, languages, and work habits Such cultural sensitivity of the leader will drive the subordinates toward work and improve the R&D performance 2.5 Interpersonal Factors 2.5.1 Transformational leadership Leadership is a relationship between leaders and subordinate and a distinctly interpersonal phenomenon (Mumford et al., 2000) It has been widely accepted from the leadership theory that, leadership, behavior and ability influences R&D performance and leader performance and research project success (Keller, 1992; Scott and Bruce, 1998; Tierney et al., 1999) It is theorized that, the leader‟s behaviors and traits directly influence the subordinates and organizational outcomes (Lee, 2007) As R&D people are a special group of human resources, some leadership attributes are highly influential and some are less influential Transformational leadership of Bass (1985), measured by with their Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (Bass and Avolio, 1990), has a positive impact on R&D team performance (Lee, 2007) Transformational leadership style influences subordinates The leader and subordinates propel one another for organizational goal attainment The transformational R&D project leaders, who provide a inspirational vision and intellectual stimulation to their subordinates, are associated with R&D project success As R&D team operates autonomously in a R&D organization; the leader‟s changeoriented, interpersonal behaviors positively influence subordinates performance (Keller, 2006), job satisfaction and R&D outcomes (Shain and Zhou, 2003) The transformational leader has the competency to inspire and motivate the subordinates for higher performance and acts as a mentor, teacher, counselor, and trainer to achieve R&D performance (Bass, 1985; Yukl, 2002) The leader shows the vision, creates enthusiasm (Bass, 1986) and avenues for subordinates‟ commitment to achieve success beyond normal expectations (Keller, 2006) 2.5.2 Leader member exchange (LMX): LMX is a leadership quality otherwise known as social exchange approach It is the quality of relationship experienced between a leader and subordinates It is a relational aspect of leadership and high quality exchange process focuses on good relations between the leader and subordinates (Graen and Cashman, 1975; Lee, 2007) This social exchange process posits that leader-subordinate relationship positively predict a leader‟s effectiveness, organizational performance (Graen and Scandura,1987), and subordinates‟ job satisfaction The high quality of LMX relationship increases the creative performance (Tierney et al., 1999) and research project success (Elkins and Keller, 2003) There exists a positive effect of LMX on R&D performance (Lee, 2007) It is the behavioral aspect of leadership which focuses on the leader‟s behaviors that directly impact on organizational outcomes It involves a high degree http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 96 editor@iaeme.com Influence of Emotion based Integrated Leadership on R & D Leader Performance of friendship, mutual trust, loyalty, respect, and good understanding of mutual commitment In this process, the leader can develop a high quality relationship with subordinates to yield high R&D outcomes Through this relationship, leaders and subordinates get an opportunity to discuss novel ideas freely, exchange R&D related information, and interim R&D results which lead to greater team performance The subordinates‟ perception of high quality exchange relationships is associated with innovation and creativity (Scott and Bruce 1994) An exchange relationship established between the supervisor and subordinates depends upon the perceptions of trustworthiness and loyalty among them (House and Aditya, 1997) Evidence suggests that high quality LMX in R&D is related with innovation and creativity of subordinates in the face of challenging tasks (Duchon et al., 1986; Graen and Cashman, 1975; Liden and Graen, 1980) Effective exchange relationships associate with patent disclosures, intrinsic motivation and use of required cognitive problem-solving strategies (Graen et al., 1982) A mature, stable, and high quality relationship is established between the leader and subordinates for successful execution of R&D projects which leads to high quality R&D outcomes The leader and the subordinates start forming a meaningful relationship where both influences each other attitudes and behaviors, and a shared reality emerges between the two parties (Graen and Scandura, 1987; Scandura and Lankau, 1996) The leader delegates the duties and responsibilities to the subordinate to complete challenging and rewarding tasks, with full trust on subordinates‟ success in that task The leader and subordinates reciprocate to carry out the duties and responsibilities even in the absence of team member This can accelerate the R&D performance and the team performance 2.5.3 Justice orientation Justice is concerned with the perception of an employee for fair treatment by the organization Greenberg (1993) emphasizes the organizational justice for the effective functioning of an organization Organizational justice comprises of three broad dimensions distributive, procedural, and interactional (Cohen et al., 2001; Masterson et al., 2000; Wang et al., 2010) Distributive justice focuses on the fairness of organizational outcomes such as payment and promotions, rights and responsibilities It also ensures that, rewards and benefits are rationalized based on R&D outcomes Procedural justice stresses the fairness of the process by which the outcomes are achieved It is adopted during the formation of policies and rules, ensures that the formation is in accordance with principles, values, and morality Interactional justice includes interpersonal behaviors between the leader and subordinates during the implementation of procedures like being truthful to subordinates and sensitive to the personal needs of team members With such justice orientation, the leader is likely to be evaluated positively and subordinates are likely to work effectively for R& D outcomes 2.5.4 Emotional intelligence Emotional intelligence comprises of personal and the interpersonal competencies (Goleman, 2011) Empathy and social skills can be equated with leadership Empathy putting oneself in other person‟s shoe and understand him or her Social skill is more concerned with individuals‟ ability and proficiency to manage relationships and building networks It is the friendliness with a purpose to achieve the organizational objectives Empathy is associated with thoughtful consideration of employee‟s feelings along with other factors in the process of making decisions Empathy is the capacity to share, react, and understand the lived experiences of others (Davis, 1994) It is identified listening (Salem, 1982) and openness, reflection (Fuslier, 1988), and social judgment (Krulewitz, 1982) In a team-based environment, a leader with empathy is sensitive to others‟ view points and freedom of expression Accordingly, a leader with empathy can develop strong teams that can work together to achieve organizational goals Without empathy in cross cultural settings, http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 97 editor@iaeme.com Pradeep Kumar Rout, Jyoti Ranjan Das, Monoranjan Puthal employee‟s interactions can generate misunderstanding Empathetic leaders can provide difficult feedback for better performance and better communication Empathy is essential for team-based job and talent retention Social skill is more concerned with individuals‟ ability to manage relationships Social skill is a proficiency in managing relationships and building networks With it, the leader builds social networks with others It is the friendliness with a purpose for moving people in a desired direction Socially skilled leaders are connected in a social network and are capable of managing teams through social interactions They build bonds widely because they know that this may help them someday Such abilities of the leader is likely to be evaluated positively and improve R&D performance 2.5.5 Authentic behavior An authentic leader cultivates honesty, loyalty, equality, altruism, kindness fairness (Yukl, 2011), integrity (Gardner et al., 2005), and takes ethical decisions (Hannah et al., 2005) The authentic leaders act with transparent decision making, confidence, optimism, hope, resilience, and consistency with their subordinates and colleagues (Avolio et al., 2005) The authentic behavior of a leader increases team bonding and heightens performance The leader‟s ethical and values-based behaviors improve subordinates‟ performance and enhance their self-awareness, self-regulation, self realization for sustained performance (Watson, 2003; Avolio et al., 2005) Authentic leaders create healthy work environments which fosters subordinate‟s work engagement and development (Wong and Cummings, 2009) Authentic leadership is positively related to subordinates‟ moral courage (Hannah et al., 2011) Bass (1999) conceptualized authentic leadership by linking the four components of transformational leadership with authentic behavior of the leader on the basis of moral character of the leaders for the self and the others Authentic leadership style includes optimism, expanded thinking, and increased selfawareness, and self regulation to make decisions (May et al., 2003) Self-awareness is the basis of the leadership It refers to the understanding one‟s own talents, strengths, sense of purpose, core values, and beliefs (Gardener et al., 2005; Walumbwa et al., 2008) It fosters relationship with subordinates on the basis of mutual trust and transparency The leadership can be successful if genuine, transparent actions of the leader are focused on subordinates‟ and organizational development and performance (Walumbwa et al., 2008) Authentic leadership has three major dimensions (Walumbwa et al., 2008): (1) transparency, (2) moral and ethical conduct, and (3) balance processing (1) The leader encourages transparency at work with colleagues and team members and are also honest and truthful before taking any decision The leader maintains a level of openness with their subordinates and provides them opportunities to approach their ideas and challenges in the workspace (2) The leader sets and maintains a high standard of moral and ethical conduct in the workspace The uni-dimensional motivation construct, each of the five dimensions knowledge sharing, each of the nine dimensions of R&D climate and each of the six dimensions of HRM practices had acceptable convergent validity (AVE>=.50) and composite reliability (>=.70) Therefore, the items measuring each variable of the moderators had acceptable convergent validity and composite reliability (Table 1) http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 98 editor@iaeme.com Influence of Emotion based Integrated Leadership on R & D Leader Performance Table Moderators influencing R&D performance and leader performance Step Path Coefficients t p Inference Motivation -> R&D performance Motivation - > Leader performance R&D climate -> R&D performance HRM practices -> R&D performance HRM practices -> Leader performance 08 03 26 1.29 13 1.36 65 72 1.13 70 17 51 469 198 482 H2.1(1a) refuted H2.1(1b) refuted H2.1(3a) refuted H2.1(4a) refuted H2.1(4b) refuted *p= R&D performance IL x R&D climate > Leader performance IL x HRM practices > R&D performance IL x HRM practices > Leader Performance Coefficient 83 92 t 25.459*** p 001 *** 001 28.942 *** 99 3.580 88 3.402*** 001 80 6.912 *** 001 8.059 *** 79 001 001 Inference H2.2(1a) supported H2.2(1b) supported H2.2(3a) supported H2.2(3b) supported H2.2(4a) supported H2.2(4b) supported *p= R& D performance HRM practices -> R& D performance HRM practices -> Leader performance 08 03 26